The Bangladesh delegation which attended a UN convention on July 31 had faced a volley of questions about human rights violations and repression against the country’s citizens. The 28-member team, led by Law Minister Anisul Huq, had to deal with the queries as it submitted the country’s first periodic report at a session of the UN Committee Against Torture (CAT) in Geneva.
In the seven-page report to the CAT, Mr Anisul Huq elaborated on different measures the government had taken since 2009 to create a suitable environment for ensuring justice and people’s rights. In response to the report, the CAT said while the report was prepared by the government, it provided information solely about the country’s legal and policy architecture related to the prevention and punishment of torture.
Referring to the Torture and Custodial Act 2013, the Law Minister said in the report that the government enacted it to give effect to the convention and also as part of the government’s unequivocal commitment to the obligations of international human rights instruments.
The minister mentioned some judicial directives, especially from the Supreme Court in this regard. The minister also provided information on 94 complaints against Rapid Action Battalion. Following investigations, 49 of those were found to be false and 44 were confirmed.
“It must be understood that in the intervening period after the assassination of our father of the nation, we suffered from a culture of impunity that created a serious erosion of values in the society…..All our efforts have been towards removing this evil from the society. And this takes time. Surely, there has been incremental progress which is there for all to see. But believe us, we will continue our journey to fulfil the dream of the father of the nation of ensuring rights of all our citizens,” the law minister noted.
CAT Vice-Chairperson Felice D Gaer welcomed the report, but said it was not focused solely on relevant issues. She also criticised the delay, and taking more than 20 years time after the government’s accession to the convention against torture in 1998.
“Could you explain to us more clearly why there has been such a delay in submitting this first periodic report?” she questioned. In the report, the law minister said it was prepared in consultation with all stakeholders, including different ministries, rights organisations and non-governmental organisations. He also mentioned that some civil society members failed to attend the view-exchange meeting.
Drawing the delegation’s attention, Gaer sought to know the details of the invitees. “Could you tell us and provide us with information who you consulted with, when and who was actually invited?” the CAT Vice-Chairperson asked.
We observed that, the leader of the delegation also couldn’t satisfy the CAT by providing genuine answers. The weakness of Bangladesh government’s position can be explained by the silly fact that the Law Minister had to take a 28-member team to travel to Geneva for submitting an untrustworthy report. The Law Minister should have known that the UN officials know more than he knows about the lawlessness in Bangladesh. The Law Minister was more anxious to satisfy the Prime Minister what a success his trip was.
We do not need any UN committee to tell us not to practice torture. Our Constitution is clear that nobody must be tortured or treated degradingly. It is also a constitutional obligation to allow assistance of a lawyer once a person is arrested.
Apart from abusing police power for political purposes, including election management, let the Law Minister ensure, if he can, that no arrested person will be taken on remand into police custody for interrogation without the presence of his or her lawyer. There exist directions of the Supreme Court discouraging such police practice of police remand for interrogation.
Everybody knows that such police custody is to create opportunities of torture and intimidation with a view to securing confession. Let the Law Minister stop interrogation in police custody alone without the presence of one’s lawyer. This is the demand of our Constitution.
The UN body will believe the report he submitted at such a heavy cost of taking an unusually big delegation to defend the indefensible.
